Slashdot Mirror
HD DVD vs Blu-ray Direct Comparisons
An anonymous reader writes "With today's release of three movies on Blu-ray, Warner Home Video has become the first studio to release movie titles on both high-def formats, making it finally possible to do an apples-to-apples comparison of the same titles on both formats . High-Def Digest has just posted reviews of all three titles — 'Training Day,' 'Kiss Kiss Bang Bang' and 'Rumor Has It' — comparing video, audio and extras to the previous HD DVD releases. Their verdict? Due to issues with image cropping, audio selection and supplemental features on the Blu-ray discs, the HD DVD versions win this first face-off."
Earlier adopters are the only ones that will see these shortcomings in either format.
Once it matures, who's going to know the difference. After reading all three of these fluffy articles, I still have no idea which format is "better" because there was no control.
I choose Betamax.
My ZooLoo
Consumers.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Isn't the PlayStation 3 essentially going to decide the "better" format? If* the PS3 sells in large volumes, then that means that Blue Ray will be de facto High Definition format?
*When
Summation 2
Early in the life of DVD, The Matrix was the one disc that really got a lot of attention. It's what convinced me that DVD was more than worth the cost - from the surround sound to the higher definition playback, it was plainly superior. Seeing it on VHS and then on DVD made me realize how much I was missing from the experience. I have yet to see either new format in action, but from all I've heard, there is no compeling reason (even when it becomes affordable) for the average Joe to upgrade from DVD to HD or Blu-ray. I highly doubt those three movies above are going to convince anyone.
They're using two different players. Doesn't that invalidate this test?
Unless there is a player out there that supports both formats, no. Mind you, it mind be far easier to build a machine to play either format than building a VCR that could play both VHS and Beta.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
Well, if this were a truly scientific experiment, then yes, the lack of a control would invalidate the results. However, the review is ultimately going after something a little more nebulous, the movie watching experience, even if they don't explicitly say such.
Moreover, doesn't the hardware's quality speak volumes about a formats potential in the market place? If the players don't work properly, who gives a flying f#@k about how great the format is? Especially since Sony will likely keep the price of blu-ray players artificially inflated b/c they're, you know, Sony.
my pet machine
Who buys it? People who have disposible income I guess. Time and again people buy products that get obsoleted by new models or new technology but it shouldn't be factor in whether you buy something now. How times do people buy new computers or cars? If you can afford it and you feel you'd appreciate it or get your moneys worth, go for it.
15 years ago I had a room mate that refused to buy audio CD's because he figured something was bound to replace it soon. I suppose now that iTunes is available he's waiting on the next big thing to supplant it. I never felt that was a good way to base my purchases on.
Especially since I mostly watch HD for Sports, not movies. DVD quality movies still look quite nice on my TV... Good enough that I don't have any reason to blow $1,000 on a new format that has almost no movies. It's just not a big enough jump over DVD for me to care. I've got better things to spend that kind of money on.
This is different because these are two competing technologies. Not buying CDs because something better will come out is just ignorant because there is no alternative. CDs were clearly the go ahead platform, whereas blu-ray and hddvd is undecided. One will eventually go away leaving the other the winner... thus the VHS/Betamax analogy.
http://religiousfreaks.com/In cases of monopoly this might make sense, but Sony is trying to lauch a new format here. Keeping the prices inflated (for any reason) is going to drive consumers towards HD-DVD.
ich muß mehr Kuhglocke haben
The real question is this: are you happy with what you have? DVDs suit me better than VHS because they do not degrade and I can skip through them instead of having to fast and rewind. What do these new technologies bring to the table? Better image quality. Honestly I am perfectly happy with DVD quality, therefore I will be saving my money for something better.
Information wants a fueled airplane waiting at the hangar and no one gets hurt.
This is not surprising at all.
Until Sony actually finds their brain and starts using modern compression techniques(y'know, ones that aren't a decade old), this will only continue. Really, MPEG-2? H.264 and the HD-DVD VC1 completely blow MPEG-2 out of the water with regards to quality/space. The Blu-Ray discs' extra space might make it closer when they start making dual-layer discs, but that's far away, and unless they also switch compression, HD-DVD will still be better.
And what does all this mean? Nothing of course. If the public actually sees fit to buy these clunkers in droves, then whoever has advertising wins. I do hope they both flop, but that's an argument for another day.
At some point you have to expect that a comparison is between things that are different, and there aren't any players capable of playing both formats.
What's frustrating about this test, though, is that there are so many differences between the players that it would almost seem necessary to go through a calibration routine with each player to ensure that the display device was properly calibrated for the source.
It'd also be nice to take the results of the test to the respective manufacturers and ask them about the output from each player and see if they have any feedback about the problems; the fact that the Samsung player is so new and that patches and firmware upgrades are likely probably makes an early comparison like this meaningless.
Almost all of the movie studios are releasing the first high-def DVD's without turning on the flag that will require the encrypted HDCP connection to view the high-definition picture. So, those of us that bought large-screen TV's a few years ago (before the HDCP interface was available) will be able to view the movies without being down-rez'ed to standard definition.
My guess is they are avoiding release of popular movies without this flag. But, they risk antagonizing people without an HDCP-enabled display if they release movies with the flag. So, how long do you suppose they will wait?
The technically superior standard almost never wins in the US.
We chose x86 over PPC
We chose VHS over BetaMax
We chose 8VSB over OFDM (for HDTV Broadcasting)
We chose CDMA over GSM (only just now starting to change)
And now we will probably end up with BluRay because of some gaming console... (PS3)
In cases of monopoly this might make sense, but Sony is trying to lauch a new format here. Keeping the prices inflated (for any reason) is going to drive consumers towards HD-DVD.
This is SONY we're talking about. They don't know how to push a new format; They think that by pushing it at a high price it'll drive the format. They haven't learned any lessons in 20 years.
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
The VHS/Betamax war was in the early 80s. Who of the "early adopters", who are usually between 20 and 30 years old, would remember that?
Besides, don't underestimate the "ohhh, shiny" effect.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
I keep hearing that the Blu-ray vs HD-DVD is just like the VHS vs Betamax from the past. There is a real problem with this analogy. With VHS vs Betamax, there wasn't any existing technology that did the same thing (unless you count reel projectors, which I don't). One of those technologies HAD to win because the market demanded the technology and there was no alternative.
The Blu-ray vs HD-DVD debate leaves out the very important aspect of existing DVD players and recorders. The market isn't really demanding a newer prettier picture quality or better sound or additional features that don't already exist on regular DVDs. With DVD-R camcorders now catching on in the consumer market, there's an even more compelling reason to stick with the older technology. It's an added feature the neither new format supports.
I predict that Blu-ray and HD-DVD will go the way of DAT and SACD. There may be a new format in the future but it's too soon and not advanced enough to take over the market. There will be a niche market for them just like Laserdisc for the true videophiles but that's all.
How about comparing both to DVD as well? I'd sure like to know why I am expected to pay 50% more for a blue-ray version of a movie than a regular DVD version.
Modern copyright is theft of culture from everyone and it retards the progress of the useful arts and sciences.
They're using two different players. Doesn't that invalidate this test?
The biggest HD-DVD supporter among the studios fucks up a Blu-Ray release? That alone should invalidate this test.
I am guessing it will go the way of DVD+- can anyone give reasons why we wont just see players that do both? Heck when was the last time you really had to pay attention to which DVD you bought? Almost everyone has +- players so I go for cheaper disks every time. I imagine that is what the blueray and HD-DVD will come down to. In the long run no one will really care, they will look for price and packaging, consumers dont care too much about the technology behind it.
CS: It is all sink or swim...oh and did I mention there are sharks in that water?
In addition to the players, you have to expect differences due to the teams that put the releases together. If it's the same team and they're more familiar with HD-DVD, then they're likely to put together a nicer HD-DVD product. If it's a different team, then there might also be differences in skill level and quality control. Throw in differences in brand new, first generation players and you're unlikely to get a perfect apples to apples comparison of what the technologies are capable of.
Though this is certainly a good attempt at comparison, the real truth will only come from building concensuss over time.
TW
I think it's safe to say that Sony is the worst company in history when it comes to competance in launching new formats.
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
What is there to compare here? The format of the media storage is completely irrelevant to the quality of the movie. The movie is encoded in a binary, compressed codec. The combination of the codec, the compression level, the decoder in the player, and the quality of the components in the player - these are what determine the quality of the movie.
And since both HD-DVD and Blu-Ray support the same codecs, it is almost totally dependant on the player. The disc format of the movie doesn't make any difference whatsoever.
What a stupid article. Why not write an article comparing a movie viewed in a white to a movie viewed in an black house? It would have about the same difference on image and sound quality.
In cases of monopoly this might make sense, but Sony is trying to lauch a new format here. Keeping the prices inflated (for any reason) is going to drive consumers towards HD-DVD.
It would be a perfectly valid argument except that Sony has a long track record of shooting themselves in the foot in exactly this manner.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Due to issues with image cropping, audio selection and supplemental features on the Blu-ray discs, the HD DVD versions win this first face-off.
Okay, so due to issues WHICH HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FORMATS THEMSELVES, HD-DVD won. This means nothing.
Not only that CD's are way the hell better than Tapes. The difference is much larger than DVD -> Blu-Ray/HD-DVD.
Go back to listening to tapes for a while and you'll see. Want to listen to a song in the middle of the tape? Bah. Fast forward, hit play every few seconds to see where you're at, fast forward some more, oops passed it, rewind... ehh.. screw that.
Plus the quality of the sound, the amount of space they holds, the fact that they don't get warn out from over use (unless you scratch the hell out of it)...
The list goes on.
Nah, neither of these technologies will become "the next betamax".
They're more likely to both become the next SACDs and DVD-Audios...
Right now, I'm not seeing either being a roaring success. Sony's insistance on basing the PS3 on Blu-ray may help ensure the format isn't lost completely, but I'm seeing two scenarios playing out here.
The first is CD (DVD) and SACD (HDDVD) and DVD-Audio. (Blu-ray)
The other is VHS (DVD) and Laserdisc (one of these formats, probably Blu-ray.)
Most consumers, either way, will stick with DVD. It works. We already have large movie collections on DVD. The quality of DVD is fine - not perfect, but largely acceptable. There are no substantial operational improvements the new formats have over DVD. The user friendliness of the technology is the same. And the equipment needed for the new formats, for now, looks to be substantially more expensive.
You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
I have read the articles, but I can't say that this is in favour of the author of the articles.. Why? since he comments on all BR's being a bit dark, and all the disks having a 'wrong' ratio should have rang a bell that it surely is the player... But the fact that the HD-sound tracks have been dumped doesn't bode well for the Blue Ray... And why the hell they chose to use Mpeg2 compression on BR while it could also be encoded in VC1 is a mistery... The only good comparison would be to rip the disks to Harddrive and then use the same player for comparison, that way, the standalone player can't be the problem.. I've got 3 different dvd-players, and they all have a different ratio and color when I put in the same dvd.. But I guess a really decent reviewer would have known of these kinds of things...
No, you're doing the wrong test. You need a typical crt based 27 inch television in a room with average lighting and a group of normal people. Then you let them watch the movies, but don't tell them if they are watching HD-DVD or Blu-Ray or plain DVD. Then you ask them for their opinion on which was best. Of course, since these are supposed to be HD formats, you would probably want to use an HD TV instead of that 27 inch TV, but you get the idea.
What is important is not which is technically the best, but what is perceived the best to the viewer. Also, not what is best under the optimum viewing conditions, but under the normal viewing conditions (since most people don't have the optimum viewing conditions).
Then the final question to ask the viewers, assuming if they can tell the difference between the formarts and the plain DVD, is give them the cost of the players and movies for the HD formatted movies compared with the plain DVD and ask them if, in their opinion, if they feel the improved quality is worth the extra price?
Not to mention that I can put DVDs on my iPod or computer for that long plane ride. I'll stick with CDs and DVDs as long as possible.
The porn industry is going to decide this one, just like they decided the betamax vs VHS.
My wager is that they'll go HD-DVD, which means the rest of us will too, despite Sony's best efforts.
Training Day wasn't the first HD-DVD, btw, Island Fever 3 with Tera Patrick was.
I wonder if either one of them will become a 'winner'. I know these can hold much more content, true HD quality, but, I'm just wondering how many of Joe Consumers out there are gonna flock to this?
I mean...DVD, is spread far into the general market. And I think the general public is quite happy with it. I dunno if HDTV or the HD dvd's are really presenting a compelling incentive to the avg. non-techie consumer to dump all they've just invested in over the past 10 years or so...to start all over again? With the still high prices of HD viewing televisons and players, combined with the strains the gas prices are putting on already taxed family budgets...I dunno if any of these are going to 'take off' in a big way. If it doesn't happen soon...the 'next' step forward will come out before these get adopted.
It will be interesting to see...I for one am not in a hurry to jump in on the HD dvd stuff....but, since I got a projector capable of HD quality...I may experiment with some FOTA capturing of HD signals...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
No alternative? I believe the parent mentioned iTunes and then of course you have mini-disc, sacd (still a "cd" but not a standard cd), and one or two dvd formats such as DVDA (I think that's what it's called).
Okay, how many of the "alternatives" you describe were available 15 years ago? You know, like from when the guy wrote this part:
15 years ago I had a room mate that refused to buy audio CD's....
I'm not a nerd. Nerds are smart.
Which will win? HD-DVD Why? Because the larger consumer mass has NO IDEA what a Blu-Ray player is. The name itself gives no clue as to what the product is. But when you mention HD-DVD, which has _DVD_ in the name, they'll understand what it is. For me, I'll stick with my upconvert DVD player. Works fine for me, and it's 1/7 the price of an HD-DVD player.
Future ruler of a small Asian-Pacific island
Of course to get that 1080p projector for your projection screen you're looking at spending around $10,000 minimum. You can get 1080p LCD projection TVs (for around $2500, or more for Sony's XRD), but the vast majority of televisions being sold as "HD" only actually offer up to 1280x720 (though there seem to be a large number offering something like 1366x768 - really weird), and with projectors it's even worse.
How do you do a head-to-head comparision of a new format with two players that have issues and limitations? From the article: "But first, a note on this comparison. I hooked up both my Toshiba HD-XA1 HD DVD player and Samsung BD-P1000 Blu-ray player to my HP Pavilion reference HDTV via its two HDMI inputs. Note, however, that the first-generation Toshiba HD DVD decks are not capable of outputting native 1080p signals (unlike the Samsung), so it was up to the HP's internal processing to upconvert the Toshiba's 1080i signal to 1080p. Also, given the Samsung's much-publicized problems with its HDMI output (due to a reported faulty noise reduction chip that results in a degraded signal via the deck's HDMI out -- Samsung is planning to correct the problem on future shipments as well as issue a firmware upgrade sometime this Fall), I also compared both the Toshiba and the Samsung via component out to ensure the most fair comparison possible between the two discs."